Population screening for colorectal cancer by flexible sigmoidoscopy or CT colonography: study protocol for a multicenter randomized trial

Author:

Regge Daniele,Iussich Gabriella,Senore Carlo,Correale Loredana,Hassan Cesare,Bert Alberto,Montemezzi Stefania,Segnan Nereo

Abstract

Abstract Background Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most prevalent type of cancer in Europe. A single flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening at around the age of 60 years prevents about one-third of CRC cases. However, FS screens only the distal colon, and thus mortality from proximal CRC is unaffected. Computed tomography colonography (CTC) is a highly accurate examination that allows assessment of the entire colon. However, the benefit of CTC testing as a CRC screening test is uncertain. We designed a randomized trial to compare participation rate, detection rates, and costs between CTC (with computer-aided detection) and FS as primary tests for population-based screening. Methods/Design An invitation letter to participate in a randomized screening trial comparing CTC versus FS will be mailed to a sample of 20,000 people aged 58 or 60 years, living in the Piedmont region and the Verona district of Italy. Individuals with a history of CRC, adenomas, inflammatory bowel disease, or recent colonoscopy, or with two first-degree relatives with CRC will be excluded from the study by their general practitioners. Individuals responding positively to the invitation letter will be then randomized to the intervention group (CTC) or control group (FS), and scheduled for the screening procedure. The primary outcome parameter of this part of the trial is the difference in advanced neoplasia detection between the two screening tests. Secondary outcomes are cost-effectiveness analysis, referral rates for colonoscopy induced by CTC versus FS, and the expected and perceived burden of the procedures. To compare participation rates for CTC versus FS, 2,000 additional eligible subjects will be randomly assigned to receive an invitation for screening with CTC or FS. In the CTC arm, non-responders will be offered fecal occult blood test (FOBT) as alternative screening test, while in the FS arm, non-responders will receive an invitation letter to undergo screening with either FOBT or CTC. Data on reasons for participation and non-participation will also be collected. Discussion This study will provide reliable information concerning benefits and risks of the adoption of CTC as a mass screening intervention in comparison with FS. The trial will also evaluate the role of computer-aided detection in a screening setting. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01739608

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Pharmacology (medical),Medicine (miscellaneous)

Cited by 20 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Uptake of Colorectal Cancer Screening and Cost-Effectiveness;Gastrointestinal and Pancreatico-Biliary Diseases: Advanced Diagnostic and Therapeutic Endoscopy;2021-11-09

2. Uptake of Colorectal Cancer Screening and Cost-Effectiveness;Gastrointestinal and Pancreatico-Biliary Diseases: Advanced Diagnostic and Therapeutic Endoscopy;2021

3. The balance of cancer screening risks and benefits;Cancer Prevention and Screening;2018-08-14

4. Does mammogram attendance influence participation in cervical and colorectal cancer screening? A prospective study among 1856 French women;PLOS ONE;2018-06-21

5. Colorectal cancer screening for average-risk adults: 2018 guideline update from the American Cancer Society;CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians;2018-05-30

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3